Re: databases/p5-gdbm "Review"

Jens Rehsack <rehsack%googlemail.com@localhost> writes:
> 2010/8/28 Greg Troxel <gdt%ir.bbn.com@localhost>:
>>
>> Jens Rehsack <rehsack%googlemail.com@localhost> writes:
>>
>>> I had several problems with that on some perl packages, especially
>>> while rebuilding all p5-* packages using pkg_rr. I run pkg_rr unattended
>>> (probably pkg_rr should define sth. like "BATCH_MODE", and
>>> PERL_MM_USE_DEFAULT should be set in BATCH_MODE only),
>>> and had 3 or 4 packages where the Makefile.PL/Build.PL waits for user
>>> input. So the pkg_rr runs the entire weekend instead of 18h.
>>
>> I see your point, but I don't think this is really about pkg_rr.
>> Basically pkgsrc does not support the concept of interaction by a human
>> with the build system of something in a pkg. Âpkg_comp and 'make
>> package-install' with dependencies both have the same problem as you are
>> running into, so doing something to pkg_rr isn't the right answer.
>
> It depends. When it's wanted that packagers stumble over those
> questions by a module, they shouldn't test in BATCH_MODE.
> I think, enabling pkg_rr to use an .pkg_rr.rc from users home (or
> $prefix/pkg_rr.rc), would be enough, because it already supports
> pass-though -D flag.
What I don't understand is why pkg_rr should be special. I think there
are two classes of cases:
1) interactive questions are bad:
pkg_comp
pkg_rr
package being built as a dependency
normal user building a package
pkg_developer building a package to see if it is ok
2) interactive questions wanted
special mode for pkg_developer to make sure the non-interactive build
is doing the right thing
So I think it's a mistake to have BATCH_MODE, because it makes it appear
that batch mode is special - but it's the normal case. Rather, we
should have a PKG_ALLOW_INTERACTIVE mode.